'Alii discunt-pro pudor!-a feminis': Jerome, Epist. 53.7.

1
Author(s): Neil Adkin
Source: The Classical Quarterly, Vol. 44, No. 2 (1994), pp. 559-561
Published by: Cambridge University Press on behalf of The Classical Association
Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/639667
Accessed: 23-02-2017 13:35 UTC

JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of content in a trusted
digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms of scholarship. For more information about
JSTOR, please contact support@jstor.org.

Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at
http://about.jstor.org/terms

Cambridge University Press, The Classical Association are collaborating with JSTOR to digitize,
preserve and extend access to The Classical Quarterly

This content downloaded from 130.235.65.144 on Thu, 23 Feb 2017 13:35:47 UTC
All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms
 SHORTER NOTES 559

Aurelius) multo melior et feracior ad

used of a male at Valerius Flaccus 5
suited to the context, where it gives
prima provenerant: provenire can be
referring to the shooting or sprin
praeter oleam vitemque et cetera
pecudumquefecundum: tarde mitescu
having seen his evil designs achieve
to put into practice the further crim

Corpus Christi College, Oxford S. J. HARRISON

'ALII DISCUNT-PRO PUDOR!-A FEMINIS': JEROME,

EPIST. 53.7.1

In the letter which initiated his correspondence with Paulinus of N

deplores the propensity of the inexpert to pontificate on scripture. T
incompetence are denounced. The second takes the following form:' alii
pudor! - a feminis, quod viros doceant' (Epist. 53.7.1). As in the
denunciations, Jerome has chosen to express himself in general terms;
nonetheless assumed that here a specific individual is meant. Nautin arg
these words Jerome was attacking Rufinus, who is here represent
intellectually dependent on his patroness Melania.1 More recently
maintained that Jerome's criticism is in fact directed against Ambro
Nautin's view that Rufinus is the target has now been re-affirmed by R
purpose of the present note is to draw attention to a piece of eviden
hitherto been overlooked; it would seem to indicate that the object of J
cannot be Rufinus.
The full text of the sentence in question is the following: 'alii discunt - pro
pudor! - a feminis, quod viros doceant, et, ne parum hoc sit, quadam facilitate
verborum, immo audacia disserunt aliis, quod ipsi non intellegunt'. Jerome's

antagonist is credited with 'quaedam facilitas verborum'., 'Verbal facility' is,

1 P. Nautin, 'Etudes de chronologie hieronymienne (393-7)', REAug 19 (1973), 222-3.
2 M. Testard, 'J6r me et Ambroise: Sur un "aveu" du De officiis de l'eveque de Milan', in
Y.-M. Duval (ed.), Jrd6me entre l'Occident et I'Orient (Paris, 1988), pp. 245-6. Testard's case has
evidently been accepted by Y.-M. Duval, 'Les premiers rapports de Paulin de Nole avec J6r me:
Moine et philosophe? Poete ou exegete?', in Polyanthema: Studi di letteratura cristiana antica
offerti a Salvatore Costanza (Stud. Tardoant. 7; Messina, 1989), p. 195. Testard argues that
Jerome's first two denunciations of incompetence are aimed at Ambrose; for evidence that the
third is also an attack on him cf. the present writer, "'Taceo de meis similibus" (Jerome,
Epist. 53.7)', VetChr 29 (1992), 261-8. Testard did not attempt a rebuttal of Nautin's thesis; he
merely set out his own as an alternative.
3 S. Rebenich, Hieronymus und sein Kreis (Stuttgart, 1992), pp. 230-1. Nautin's in-
terpretation had also been accepted by J. N. D. Kelly, Jerome: His Life, Writings, and
Controversies (London, 1975), p. 192. Most recently P. Lardet, L'apologie de JRr6me contre
Rufin: Un commentaire (Leiden, 1993), p. 288, has simply recorded both views and observed that
'une cible n'exclut pas forcement l'autre'.
4 Nautin (op. cit. n. 1), 223, n. 51, remarks that 'la mime expression' occurs in the Liber de
optimo genere interpretandi (Epist. 57), where Jerome defends his translation of Epiphanius'
famous letter to John of Jerusalem: 'ac ne forsitan accusator meus facilitate, qua cuncta
loquitur...' (Epist. 57.1.2). Nautin accordingly argues that here too the reference must be to
Rufinus; his reasoning is accepted by G. J. M. Bartelink, Hieronymus, Liber de optimo genere

This content downloaded from 130.235.65.144 on Thu, 23 Feb 2017 13:35:47 UTC
All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms
 560 SHORTER NOTES

however, the last attribute that Je

enjoyed close contact in youth and
Jerome was thoroughly familiar wi
vignette is revealing: 'testudineo G
gradu et per intervalla quaedam vix p
non proloqui' (Epist. 125.18.2).5
In fact Jerome speaks of Rufinus
opposite of' facilitas verborum '. The
praef.) ;7 'audio praeterea scorpium, m
'tu qui in latinis mussitas et testudin
debes scribere ... ' (Adv. Rufin. 1.17) ;
'compeditam putes linguam eius et
sonum erumpere' (ibid. 2.11).10 The a
applies to Rufinus,11 itself connotes
A further passage merits attentio
independent treatises is prefaced by
'nusquam tamen concitus adest nobi
spatia rapidioribus cursibus supera
valuerimus eo quo vocas passibus
inadequacy are legion in ancient lite
this passage would seem to be sign
(concitus, rapidioribus, tardis). No
language.14 The passage would the
Rufinus' want of fluency.
interpretandi (Epistula 57): Ein Komment
Nautin's deduction is however inadmissi
different. Whereas Jerome employs
le... perficiendae, mobilitas, agilitas' (so T
is adduced at 66-7), the meaning in letter
credulitas, levitas (cf. Gloss. licentia)'
74.27-8).
' The ensuing description of Rufinus as
light of the phrase which introduces th
6 Allusions to his 'eloquence' are of co
7 For the reference to Rufinus cf. F. Ca
Paris, 1922) i.2 131.
8 Here 'testudineo gradu' clearly denote
9 Lardet (op. cit. n. 3), p. 100, points in
Hier. 1.11 ('dicebam me...ad latinum ser
Hist. praef. (' qui in tam multis annis usu
acknowledges that such avowals simply b
Jerome's own oeuvre (cf. T. Janson, La
[Stockholm, 1964], pp. 137-8). Jerome's c
10 On 'inextricabilibus nodis' Lardet
litteraire'. However the parallels he adduc
halting and inarticulate style.
11 For documentation cf. Cavallera (op
12 Cf. P. Antin, 'Jer6me, Ep. 125.18.2-
une elocution defectueuse, c'est sans do
homini tantum et suibus intumescit" (P
question de porc aphone en Macedoine
13 Cf. Janson (op. cit. n. 9), pp. 124-41 (
288, n. 3).
14 Bpa8vyAwaaoo occurs at Gerontius, V. Mel. iun. praef. and Ps. Epiphanius, Hom. 5 p.
488A; however, this is clearly an echo of Exod. 4.10.

This content downloaded from 130.235.65.144 on Thu, 23 Feb 2017 13:35:47 UTC
All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms
 SHORTER NOTES 561

In Jerome's attacks on Rufinus tha

the kind of polemical cliche to whic
being gratuitously malicious. These
the same is also true of Jerome's a
opposite fault is castigated: Ambros
Again the evidence may be set out
'tanto se fudit eloquio, ut, quidquid
ordinarit, expresserit' (ibid. 22.22.3)
(ibid. 53.7.2);17 'eloquentiam iung
pompaticum iactare sermonem' (In E
atque formosum et exquisitis hinc in
'in verbis luderet' (Horn. Orig. in L
verborum' in Jerome's letter to Pau
target is not Rufinus, but Ambrose.
One final point may be briefly made
object of Jerome's denunciation Rebe
context of Jerome's celebrated quar
seem to have overlooked the fact that
whereas Ambrose had a big reputati
University of Nebraska at Lincoln NEIL ADKIN

15 Y.-M. Duval, 'Pelage est-il le censeur inconnu de l'Adversus l

Ou: Du "portrait-robot" de l'heretique chez S. Jer6me', RH
discussion of Jerome's attack on Rufinus' inarticulateness Anti
adduces only one parallel that does not concern Rufinus himsel
Paul. 7).
16 For the reference to Ambrose cf. the present writer, 'Ambrose and Jerome: The opening
shot', Mnemosyne n. s. 46 (1993), 369-73.
17 For the Ambrosian reference cf. the present writer (op. cit. n. 2).
18 For Ambrose as target cf. W. Dunphy, 'On the date of St Ambrose's De Tobia', SEJG 27
(1984), 29-33.
19 Rebenich (op. cit. n. 3), p. 230, n. 167.
2o For Jerome's repeated attacks on Ambrose's exegetical shortcomings cf. A. Paredi, 'S.
Gerolamo e S. Ambrogio', in MWlanges Eugene Tisserant (Stud. Test. 235; Vatican City, 1964)
v. 2 183-98 passim.

This content downloaded from 130.235.65.144 on Thu, 23 Feb 2017 13:35:47 UTC
All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms